Claimant v Professional Game Match Officials Limited

Withdrawn by claimant at the start of the hearing and dismissed by agreement.

Withdrawn by claimant at the start of the hearing and dismissed by agreement.

By majority decision (Mr Peart dissenting), the tribunal found that while physical contact on 29 March 2023 created an intimidating environment, it was not related to sex. The majority concluded Mr Child would have treated a male referee the same way when frustrated. The actions on 19 August 2023 were anodyne and did not create the prescribed atmosphere. Mr Peart believed the physical contact was related to sex as Mr Child was comfortable grabbing the claimant in part because she was a woman.

Tribunal unanimously found that neither the email of 29 March 2023 nor 20 August 2023 constituted protected acts. The complaints did not contain express or implicit allegations of breach of the Equality Act 2010. The term 'manhandle' was neutral and the context did not suggest the touching was related to sex without the claimant making some suggestion to that effect.

Tribunal found the respondent had a potentially fair reason for dismissal - either as a qualification under s.98(3)(b) ERA 1996 (inclusion on FIFA list analogous to driving licence requirement) or some other substantial reason given employment was conditional on FIFA list inclusion. The principal reason for the claimant dropping off the FIFA list was her relative performance. In circumstances where employment was conditional on FIFA list inclusion and the main reason was performance-based ranking, dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses.

Tribunal found clause 18.2 of the contract, which allowed payment in lieu of notice, explicitly referred only to overriding notice periods in clause 18.1, not clause 3.5. It was unclear whether clause 18.2 applied to notice under clause 3.5. Following the contra proferentem rule, uncertainty was resolved in the claimant's favour. The respondent breached contract by paying only basic salary during notice period when claimant was entitled to work through the 3-month notice period under clause 3.5.